Denise Shick
Image via YouTube

Monday, Denise Shick writes: California Passes Law Allowing 12-Year-Olds To Get Tax-Paid Transgender Treatments. The subtitle of this intellectually challenging treatise reads:

In the nation’s most progressive state, you only need to be 12 years old to privately seek and consent to treatment for gender transitioning.

So what? A qualified physician has to authorize treatment and the American Academy of Pediatricians has endorsed the gender affirming care model. The law that Shick is referring to is AB-2119 which is relevant to “Foster care: gender affirming health care and mental health care.” The measure ensures that foster parents cannot deny medically necessary care. Children do not determine what is medically necessary. Doctors do that.

Denise Shick is an anti-transgender warrior. She had a trans father who was a crappy parent. Now every transgender person is a crappy individual. She states something that is correct:

The new law also includes this provision: “All children in foster care, as well as former foster youth up to 26 years of age, are entitled to Medi-Cal coverage without cost share or income or resource limits. The Medi-Cal program provides transition-related health care services when those services are determined to be medically necessary.”

Earlier in her polemic she points out that you have to be 16 to drive and 18 to purchase a rifle in California. That has nothing to do with medically necessary health care. There are preteens with gender dysphoria. Denying them gender-affirming care after proper medical evaluation amounts to child abuse. It would most often relate to the religiosity of the foster parents which should have no connection to what is, or is not, medically appropriate.

Foster kids in California and many other states have state-supported medical care. That is just common sense.

Shick goes on to explain:

Adolescents are no longer little children, but they are not even close to being ready to make adult decisions. Choosing one’s gender—as if that really is a choice—is also certainly not a decision to be placed in the hands of one who “goes back and forth between high expectations and lack of confidence,” or one who “experiences more moodiness,” or who “feels a lot of sadness or depression.”

Children do not choose their gender. If they did it would coincide with their natal sex 100% of the time. No one wants to have incongruent sex and gender. Ergo, their age is irrelevant. The phrases in quotes are from the CDC regarding 12 to 14 year-olds. None of it is applicable to children with gender dysphoria.

It manages to get dumber:

Many studies have found that human brains take a long time to develop fully—as long as 25 years or more. That means that adolescents are at a distinct disadvantage in decision making. That’s why you see the immaturity issues listed in the CDC analysis above. Chronologically, adolescents are only about halfway to full brain development. Yet the new California allows—and almost compels—adolescents to make irreversible, potentially life-altering decisions.

Again, children do not make a decision about their gender and gender identity is probably understood by the age of two (so is sexual orientation). After referring to the hate group, American College of Pediatricians (which is such an invaluable source of valid information):

This presumably well-meaning law has placed children as young as 12 ahead of caring foster parents in making decisions that could render those children incapable of one day having and raising children of their own—children who would have one day grown up and made decisions of their own. Wise decisions, we would hope. Those capable of making wise choices must stand firm in the struggle against those who simply mean well.

When this horrible woman makes a “wise choice” please do let me know. Meanwhile she is the nitwit-du-jour.

Related content:

By David Cary Hart

Retired CEO. Formerly a W.E. Deming-trained quality-management consultant. Now just a cranky Jewish queer. Gay cis. He/Him/His.